The city
14% (11)

The state
1% (1)

The federal government
3% (2)

The schools
33% (26)

None of the above
32% (25)

Document

When Gov. Jerry Brown proposed ending redevelopment in California to help balance the state budget last year, local officials lambasted the plan.

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders called it a sad day and a money grab by Sacramento politicians.

“Our neighborhoods will suffer with their attempted extortion at taking money from us,” Sanders predicted at a news conference last July.

National City Mayor Ron Morrison used more sinister language.

“Jesse James used a gun when he robbed people,” Morrison said.

Now that the plan is taking effect, it’s not clear that Sacramento ended up with all the loot.

Local agencies forked over $162.7 million in redevelopment funds last week, and $157 million came right back.

The funds had been collected through a special tax mechanism that went only to municipal redevelopment efforts, not to other local taxing agencies that would normally get a cut. Now the funds have been redistributed using normal tax-sharing plans.

The top recipients were the county government and local schools. Each got about $39 million.

For the schools, the money was not new — it was just funded by the former redevelopment funds instead of the state. For the county, the money was a windfall.

Ron Roberts, chairman of the Board of Supervisors, issued a statement saying he and his colleagues are not planning to spend the money any time soon.

“Because of likely legal challenges, the prudent course of action is to set this money aside and wait to see if the courts, or legislative channels, reverse or modify this action,” the statement said. “It would be unfair to taxpayers to spend the dollars and then have to potentially cut from other programs if the courts order a refund.”

County officials for years have complained about state lawmakers forcing counties to provide services without funding them. The windfall doesn’t make up for it, Roberts’ spokesman said.

“This one-time funding source, which may not survive, does little to offset the millions of ongoing dollars the state has cut in program revenue over time,” spokesman Tim McClain said.

The city of San Diego turned over almost $90 million last week. This week it received $18.7 million back under the standard tax-sharing formulas.

A spokesman stood by Sanders’ previous complaints about the fund shift, noting that the money sent to schools excuses Sacramento from funding that amount.

“Every dollar they don’t have to distribute to the schools is a dollar they can spend on other programs,” said David Graham, the mayor’s point man on redevelopment. “It is an indirect way of plugging Sacramento’s budget woes.”

San Diego Unified School District’s chief of staff, Bernie Rhinerson, called the infusion of funds this week a wash because the state withheld a like amount late last year. Yet he was glad to get the cash.

“We’re just being funded what we had planned to be getting,” he said. “We’ve been cut for six straight years. We really don’t have a choice about how the state funds us.”

The city of San Marcos transferred almost $20 million to the state last week. Mayor Jim Desmond was not pleased.

“That money was extorted form us,” Desmond said.

Under the funding formula approved by the state Department of Finance, the San Marcos Unified School District received $9.4 million. “At least some of it stayed local,” Desmond said.

State officials said cities are getting a bigger slice of general tax revenue since redevelopment agencies have been eliminated.

“It’s general purpose revenue that they can spend as they see fit, above and beyond what the base property taxes generate,” said H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the state Department of Finance.

Morrison, the National City mayor, complained that the state damaged cities in two ways: first by eliminating redevelopment and second by refusing to fund projects approved just ahead of a Feb. 1 cutoff for committing money for redevelopment projects.

“This has been a huge shell game,” Morrison said. “The Department of Finance has been given incredible dictatorial power.”

State lawyers determined that only the contracts and obligations in effect when the law was signed should be honored, Palmer said, rather than projects hurriedly approved in time for the later Feb. 1 cutoff.

“It is the interpretation of our legal counsel that June 27, 2011, is the effective date of the bill,” Palmer said.

Some last-minute San Diego projects that may never be funded with redevelopment dollars include a $63 million renovation of the Sports Arena property, a $150 million reconstruction of C Street and $107 million for a new train station on Pacific Highway.

Anti-tax crusader Richard Rider said the legislation should be judged on whether extra money goes to schools and special districts, and that is not happening.

“Redevelopment was a honey pot for special interests, business people and so forth, almost on parallel with what we’ve seen with labor unions,” he said. “One thing that’s not being considered would be lowering taxes. That’s off the table.”